Tuesday, May 31, 2016

Schuyler's Publishing Plans for 2017! (Quentel NIV, Single Column NASB, and More)

If you want an excellent review of Schuyler's recent Quentel NKJV, swing on over to the Bible Buying Guide. Randy always does excellent work and his photographs are among the best out there. You'll get a great idea of the build of the book and the texture of the leather....not to mention the lush gold leaf and art gilt.

Schuyler has gone from strength to strength in a short period of time. 2014 and 2015 were exciting years for the company. With the previously mentioned Quentel NKJV released, the remainder of 2016 seems to be coming into view.

Aside from the Canterbury KJV (much discussed and eagerly anticipated), Schuyler looks to close out the year with a second edition of Quentel ESV. The second edition is printed on 36 GSM PrimaBible paper and will have new maps. The first edition generated a lot of excitement - it will be interesting to see if Schuyler improves on it. Of particular interest will be the comparison between the 38 GSM of the first edition and the 36 GSM of the second. Publishers are honing in on 36 GSM as the point of equilibrium between opacity and thickness/portability. We'll see how the second edition goes - after all, it does have a tough act to follow!

Although nothing is official and plans are still subject to change, here is some preliminary information on what looks to be on tap for Schuyler in 2017:

Single Column NASB - This should feature the updated text. The NASB is a great translation. Getting it in a single column format with Schuyler's treatment ought be fantastic.

Quentel ESV Credo - The name says it all. The Quentel ESV with the confessions of faith found in the now out-of-print ESV Credo.

Quentel NIV - If everything comes together, this ought to be the one to watch in 2017. The Quentel format is highly praised, and it is due to be applied to one of the dominant English translations in the world. The NIV is not merely popular - it is huge, a monster among translations, having sold more than 400 million copies. It may well be the most popular English translation available and its influence is only matched by the KJV (historically speaking). Again, this is one to watch.

The forecast for Schuyler's 2017 looks quite good from this vantage point.

Saturday, May 28, 2016


ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ. In recent years, I've come to find the title of the book commonly known as the Acts of the Apostles.

Historical study provides us with some idea of the complex compositional history of Acts. Intended as the second part of Luke's narrative, the book is thought to be either a stylized literary construct, or perhaps a tantalizing glimpse into an actual diary of early Christian activity. Whatever the case may be, between the fourth and sixth century we see the title ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ attached to the book.

The manuscript history could provide us with an important indicator of the early church's reflection on the book. Although there is no indication the book was known by any other title in its history, the available manuscript history, it can be argued, suggests the appellation by which the book is known could have coincided with the increased influence of philosophical thought in the early Church (truly, what has Athens to do with Jerusalem?) If historical critical scholarship is correct and the titles of the New Testament books were often applied at a later date, then we can legitimately ask how both the concept of praxis in philosophy and among the ascetic discipline of early Christian monastics may have influenced the early Church's conceptualization of the second part of the Luke-Acts literary unit.

Early Christian monasticism inherited the philosophical distinction between theoria (or theoretical knowledge) and that of practical knowledge. In the monastic schema (perhaps best exemplified in Cassian's Conferences) practical knowledge or praxis (the action of daily life) is required before one can acquire theoria. There is no such thing as simply going off and contemplating the transcendent. One acquires the "credibility" to learn theoria (or the contemplative knowledge of God) through mastery of daily life. This is typically demonstrated through the varying early Christian forms of asceticism and monastic rules.

Monasticism traditionally, therefore, grounds the Christian in the experience and mastery of one's daily life, without which any pretense to some sort of contemplative insight into the being and nature of God ought to suspect.

It is, in retrospect, one of the greatest tragedies in Christianity that guides for the praxis of the Christian life were relegated to monasteries whereas the non-monastic clergy and laity were largely left with simple admonitions against sin and exhortations to piety. The deeper reflection on the means and purpose of the Christian life was reserved for groups of men (predominately) who were effectively directed away from any deep embedded role within the largely (and presumably Christian) society.

This is not to say that everyone should be a monk or that monasticism ought to be applied outside of the traditional monastic context. This said, the idea that we should be concerned with the praxis of the Christian life (and what it looks like) seems to have renewed relevance as Western culture continues to distance itself from anything resembling a Christian presupposition or worldview. In a cultural context in which Christianity is no longer conceived as the elementary foundation of the worldview and is increasingly seen as either one option among many in religious marketplace, if not an outdated notion needing to be replaced, Christianity must be able to clearly enunciate a praxis for life. If not to distinguish itself for a broader culture to which it is now alien, then to provide its members some greater context in which to have the experiential realization of their religion - an item of urgency given the percentages that fall away from their religion in favor of a more non-committal worldview.

What does it look like to live Christianity for the duration of one's life? What does a life enmeshed in a Christian worldview look like? How ought it be achieved? How does Christian praxis align with the most elemental milestones in our growth and understanding? And to what end? What is the point at which one can say life is no longer for the flesh, but the spirit, or, at what point does one achieve such growth that one begins to glean some perceptible sense of understanding the divine? These and other questions of a similar quality take on more importance as Christianity ceases to be something inherited from the culture and becomes more and more something intentionally sought by the individual.

Should there be some quality of the Christian life that distinguishes it from the secular life? The response to this proposition by many "moderns" among more mainline denominations in the 60s and 70s was a resounding "NO!" Corresponding with this rejection, there has been a decline in among the same denominations, both of ordained clergy and active adherence. Does the correspondence equal causation? This is always a difficult point to argue. What may be said is that if there is no distinction between the praxis of the Christian life and that of the secular life, why bother accepting religious precepts and restrictions?

If intellectual musing seems befuddled by the thought that there should be something distinctive about the Christian life compared to the secular life, the popular imagination still has some sense that there ought to be something different about people claiming Christian affiliation. I recently spoke with a women who describes herself as liberal and "very forward thinking and progressive." She noted that she has known many evangelicals and to the one, two traits always presented themselves: 1) morally conservative and not squeamish about calling something wrong, 2) always ready to give you the shirt off of their back. She remarked, "it is kind of weird. We think we're being so inclusive and open to everyone, but we're kind of cold. Meanwhile, the people we perceive as constantly rejecting others is probably the most open to other people, in that they're not indifferent to you."

Is this sentiment all inclusive of the praxis of Christianity? I would hope not!  However, it begins to underscore that Christianity has the most to offer when it inculcates a life that is distinct from the status quo and perceptions of this women illustrate one way in which this could become apparent.

We live in a post-Christian world. It is time to seriously reflect upon how we ought to do so.

Thursday, May 26, 2016

Bibliotheca and the perils of modern book publishing.

Bibliotheca was/is an ambitious project announced in 2014 that sought to produce the bible (KJV, I believe) in four volumes and formatted in such a way as to appeal to the contemporary reader. A Kickstarter campaign was launched that raised some 1.3 million USD towards the project. Nearly two years on and early backers and enthusiasts of the project are beginning to question the project's credibility.

First, it needs to be noted that I don't have a dog in this fight. I didn't back or endorse the project, so there is nothing invested in it. No do I think the person behind the project is scamming anyone.

Second, I genuinely like the idea of reader's bibles and I entirely agree with those who say this is a timely project. This said, I eagerly awaited Crossway's own multi-volume reader's edition of the ESV.

Third, in no manner am I trying to disparage the project or dissuade anyone from supporting.

This being said...

There were a few indications that this project would take on a life of its own that Adam Greene was not prepared to reign in. By his own admission (via updates sent to backers) he has conceded that there were numerous criteria to the project that he did not anticipate and fulfilling these criteria is essential to the project's credibility. My gut impulse then was that this was a talented individual from the book designing/packaging world but that the project was too much caught up in the wave of excitement over reader's bibles. Like many Kickstarter projects, there were many concrete details that were lacking which would normally be part of any business proposal the closer the deal gets to involving commitment to buy and/or the exchange of funds. Most importantly, there was no published timeline with clearly defined check-in points that would illustrate the progress of the project and agreed upon landmarks denoting success or failure. Adam Greene has had the baptism-by-fire experience of learning on the fly what must done for a venture like this. Furthermore he has also learned that in the publishing world, delays are inevitable. As of the latest update, the contracted proof reading with Peachtree is finished and European printers have begun printing the initial batch.

Is two years a long time to wait for a publishing project to be completed? That depends on one's point of reference.

Remember the Baronius Press Breviary? Not long after the successful publication of the same company's hand missal, a three volume Latin-English breviary was announced. Between re-typesetting, replacing the Pian psalter with the Vulgate psalter, and settling the funds to get the first print run in production, it took approximately 4-5 years. And this from a publisher that had successfully announced and launch titles involving similar production.

Delays happen. If the design process is not fully vetted, increased time-to-market is inevitable. It takes either a massive corporate publishing house with copious resources or an independent house with smart people (and a lot of foresight) to successfully set a publication date and reach it.

Will Bibliotheca deliver? I suspect it eventually will. What remains to be seen is whether or not the final product can meet expectations.

Tuesday, May 24, 2016

Tyndale Select NLT - Black Goatskin (Review)

There are a number of well written and well photographed reviews of the Tyndale Select. I recently discovered the publisher is now out-of-stock on the black goat skin and the calf skin is in limited supply. It seemed good to offer a brief review.

To begin with, it should be noted that 2015 saw three premium releases of the NLT. Schuyler, Allan, and Tyndale all released a version designed to appeal to those looking to make an investment on a bible that will have a long shelf life. This is of no little significance: the NLT is an extremely popular English translation, but it has seen very few premium treatments.

Compared between the two other editions mentioned above, the Tyndale Select's strengths sufficiently raise the publisher's own product above that of either premium bible firm. Tyndale hits just about all the notes correct with the Select. The dimensions and quality of leather make for a pleasing tactile experience - it rests comfortably in the hand and is easy enough to take with you. This actually gets high marks from me as I predominately use a bible in a liturgical or para-liturgical function - this easily a deal breaker, so far as I am concerned. The physical form of the Tyndale Select lends itself to prayer, which, ideally, should be the first function of any bible.

The typeface and typography are good...very good, hard to beat actually. It is easy to read and the page layout (single column, references at the side of the page, and occasional textual notes at the bottom) is optimal so far as concerns both facilitating a reading experience and providing information relevant to the linguistic and literary context of the text.

The opacity on par with the Cambridge Clarion series (and similarly benefits from line matching). Opacity is always a trade off - you will always gain or lose something due to opacity.

The same with ribbons, actually. A history of using old liturgical books leads me to applaud the decision to use thread ribbons. Alas, I fear Tyndale will take some of the criticism out there too much to heart and opt for satin ribbons on the next edition.

As mentioned above, the goatskin editions are out of stock at the publisher, but you can still find copies at ChristianBook.com.  The calfskin edition is also available. In my experience, calfskin is a little more "rugged" than goatskin, so it may be worth checking out.

In conclusion, if you are in the market for an NLT and you want something built to last, I would direct you to the Tyndale Select over its competitors on the market place, if only for the fact that the NLT finally has an iconic edition.

Monday, May 23, 2016

Updated Specs: ESV Reader's Bible in Topgrain Cowhide

I like the ESV Reader's Bible. I REALLY like the ESV Reader's Bible. So, the impending topgrain treatment of one of the most engaging bibles out there is enough to get me updating with any information as it comes available.

So now, here are some specs for the release:

Production will not be from LEGO SpA. We'll have to wait for LEGO to have another crack at it another day.

The pages will be gold gilt, but no art gilding - premium aficionados might be disappointed, but this really doesn't lessen the production quality in my eyes.

The paper will be 30gsm thin opaque paper (as found in the cloth bound and imitation leather version). Again, some readers might be put off by this, however, 30gsm is pretty much standard practise in the industry.

Ultimately, I am excited for this one. In the next few days I'll put up a review of the Reader's Bible (both imitation leather and cloth bound). I'm not going to say it is the absolute perfect formatting - but it is nearly there.

Sunday, May 22, 2016

ESV Reader's Bible - Topgrain Cowhide

A while back I reviewed (ever so briefly) Crossway's Reader's Gospels. This was a fantastic supplement to its Reader's Bible, and it was printed by LEGO SpA - an Italian firm that has been expanding its footprint in English materials.

The Reader's Gospels was executed just about to perfection and at an attractive price for the cowhide binding. Crossway appears to be going full on with a Topgrain Cowhide edition of the Reader's Bible, set to drop September 30th, 2016.

I've linked to ChristianBook.com for the pre-order - they've got it at a nice price especially if the list price on Crossway's website holds true.

Now, here's the deal breaker - is this printed by LEGO SpA in Italy, or is Crossway going to make use of the Chinese printer they've historically utilized for their leather editions? Time will tell -  I hope LEGO is responsible for bringing this one to press, but to Crossway's credit, they've got some good quality control at their Chinese printers.

Friday, May 20, 2016

The Trend of Premium Bibles as a minor form of idol worship?

I like to disengage from the topics I would normally write about. One of my favorite distractions involves admiring the range of premium bibles (bibles made of real leather, more opaque, and a sturdier book block). Doing so brings me into contact (online or otherwise) with people who would typically not have on iota of interest in the material on this blog. But it is a good time....and I really like looking at all those photo and video reviews!

Now, I personally haven't committed to purchasing any premium bible. I tend to frequent the ancient languages or read it in Italian. My English editions of choice fall along scholarly lines and are typically not the type of edition to receive "premium" treatment.

In the premium bible circles I occasionally drop in on, there has been recent discussion regarding the morality behind dropping $200 - $300 USD on a leather bound bible....multiple times...per year...developing an impressive portfolio in the process.

Now, I love the online media coverage of the premium bible market - it is fun stuff. This being said, replace "Bible" with "Porche" and one does begin to look at the whole thing with a wary eye. If one knew someone with a number of luxury cars, most people would eventually wonder (at least silently) "buddy, don't you have enough?" Similarly, when one sees certain blogs or youtube channels with multiple "luxury" bible reviews per year, one begins to wonder if this is not turning into an obsession on the pure material good and nothing more.

The whole premium bible market (limited as it is) seems ready to implode - frankly, publishers devising "new premium models" with scant design or formatting differences between them is threatening to glut the market with redundant product. What was something special 3 or so years ago is threatening to become a trend past due.

The contemporary ballyhoo over premium bibles needs some context. Here we go: we're living in the dark ages of book publishing! Since the late 60s/early 70s, book publishing conventions have changed. One need only consult examples of the breviaries produced in the first half of the 20th century for an illustration. American readers may well be familiar with the volumes produced by Benziger Brothers. These were sturdy book blocks, supple leather, and opaque pages (little to no bleed through)  - they were built for heavy use. The same held true for leather bound bibles published during the same period.

What was once convention in book binding (particularly of religious text) has now become rare. The 1970s saw changes in publishing standards brought on by both changes in technology (the rise of bonded leather) and the market (paper as a good requiring increases in costs to source it). Bonded leather replaced real leather - and it was typically no more than slapping a thin layer on paper end-sheets. Otherwise it was vinyl of some sort. Paper was increasingly subject to various requirements that reduced the amount of thread actually in the paper. Smyth sewn binding was displaced in favor of a more economical glue job. Where older materials were still used (such as with the Vatican's leather editions of the Liturgia Horarum), modern assembly techniques often did a poor job securing the book block to the cover, resulting in early detachment and separation from the end-pages.

Anyone who has held a bible published in, say, the 40s, 50s, or 60s wants to know why it is so hard to find one published in a similar way today. Enter "premium bible publishing." The market is trying to meet a demand that even the consumer may not adequately understand. The desire isn't so much for a "premium bible," but that bible publishing would return to an earlier standard...which makes sense, really.

A well bound book is going to last. Bibles, breviaries, even the much hyped altar missals that coincided with the new English translation of the Roman Missal are notable for a good aesthetic appearance disguising poor construction specs. To quote a Dominican priest I know who once lamented to me about his leather set of breviaries a year after purchasing them, "what the hell do you have to do to get a good book?" (This was an $800 or $900 investment on his part)

I don't think I'll ever be more than a passive observer of "premium bibles" - some of the price points seem a tad over what they are actually worth. But I fully understand the appeal and why certain people jump at the chance to snatch them up. I mean, really, what the hell do you have to do to get a good book?

The end of Traditionalism?

Wonders (and rumors) never cease. There is more mainstream traction to the notion that Francis will fully reconcile the SSPX.

A leaked document proves to be the source of this rumor - an internal memo from the SSPX detailing an expectation that Francis may soon make an offer and it may well be time to accept it. The New Liturgical Movement has published the text of the internal memo. There has been a susbsequent interview with Francis stating that the possibility is there, the kinks merely need to be ironed out.

The memo itself reflects the muddled ecclesiology of the SSPX - the romantic but unhistorical concept of the papacy, trying to hold the line of infallibility and supreme jurisdiction while at the same time maintaining a form of legitimate dissent and, ultimately, the authority of Tradition being supreme to even that of the Roman Bishop (the last point in SSPX ecclesiology actually makes the most sense).

Pragmatic concerns seem to be the impetus behind the letter. There seems to be a sense that some overture is imminent, to the point that serious charges against the SSPX's credibility would be raised were they to reject it.  The memo reflects a particular point of view in the SSPX, although it gives the sense that some elements in the society have tired of the long haul and would entertain a quick and dirty regularization without any indication that Rome was hedging away from its post-Vatican II direction. Perhaps I am wrong, but this memo seems to back track from the hypothetical canonical solution conceived in previous years - the idea that "Rome will convert" seems to have taken a back seat to "just let us do our thing."

At one point (many years ago), this was the hope against hope I held onto as a young man. At that time, reconciling the SSPX was  Since then, so many things have changed around the world of Traditional Catholicism that is impossible to recognize in today's Traditionalists the source of inspiration, dynamism, and even mysticism that guided so much of my personal formation and nurtured my critical stance towards modernity, and modern Catholicism. Or, perhaps I've simply changed.

Traditionalism, in the Roman context, began shaking off many of its ecclectic. Liturgical observance has coalesced around the books of 1962 and discussion of older editions of the Roman liturgy is considered fringe or signs of sedevacantism. Traditionalism is now almost exclusively defined by Lefebvre's movement, its ideology and piety. There is little to no interest in what was actually going on in the Roman Church prior to Vatican II - the liturgical movement and the Catholic Worker movement at their peaks, for instance. The in-roads made by the original liturgical movement as concerns liturgical praxis and observance in the Roman Church are lost, as is the burgeoning counter-cultural response to Western socio-economics. Discussion of classical Catholicism, loosely defined as either pre-Vatican I or Pre-Tridentine is absolutely off the table. What is left is an ultra-conservative piety needing to find some place with the modern Roman milieu.

Roman Traditionalism is, by and large, a "movement" that has become unrecognizable with its earliest decades, so converged and homogenized on Lefebvre's pragmatism at the exclusion of the myriad of influences behind its initial formation. This is perhaps understandable; over time, all movements begin to streamline and exclude anything out of model as they gain more standing. By the twilight of John Paul II's papacy, the effects of Ecclesia Dei and Ratzinger's public acceptance of the Roman liturgy as it was in 1962 had the effect of blunting Traditionalism's edge. Summorum Pontificum, meanwhile, sufficiently domesticated it. Traditionalism in the Roman context is no longer a matter of refusing and resisting modernity or challenging the deficiencies of Roman ecclesiology. Such goals, even among Traditionalists, are considered extreme and utterly obscure. Traditionalism is now focused on getting a slice of the modern ecclesiastical pie - recondition and freedom are the utmost goals.

Should a resolution come between Rome and the SSPX, then Traditionalist will have reached its end, coming to the conclusion of its movement. It will be impossible (or at least highly impractical) to continue along any path of resistance. Doing so will be seen as stubborn recalcitrance. Traditionalism will be positioned as having gotten everything it desired, without having accomplished much of anything, certainly compared to the loftier vision that inspired it during its earliest years.

Traditionalism will be tolerated. It will not be victorious, in part due to its confused ecclesiology (unable to reconcile its implicit critiques of the Roman doctrine of the papacy with the insistence on a very pious adulation of the figure of the Roman Pontiff. In larger part, it will be merely tolerated based on the sheer acceptance of the modernization of the Roman Church, most especially in the area of liturgy. For better or worse, the majority of the Roman Church, particularly in the global south, has fully adopted the modern expression of Roman Catholicism. There is no indication of any desire to proceed in a contrary fashion.

There are those who hold tremendous faith in Traditionalism that will argue that if a resolution is found, the movement will be positioned to exude influence on the broader Roman Church. To what end?  To foster a greater adoption of Traditionalism as ultimately defined by Lefebvre's decisions for the make up of his own society? Fair enough, what is gained?

Using liturgy as our example, Traditionalism's narrow reading of the liturgical movement has cultivated a popular sentiment among the movement that the Roman liturgy was perfected in 1962, ignoring the coherent arguments for some level of liturgical reform, be it the increased use of the vernacular or preference for an audibly chanted liturgy the abolition of the low Mass. Leaving aside the dispute surrounding the modern Roman liturgy, there were persuasive arguments pointing at corruptions to the celebration of the Latin liturgy that had become custom in the Roman Church. The goal of the liturgical movement was, as Ratzinger observed during the last years of his papacy, was to eliminate the gap between the liturgy as celebrated at the altar and the liturgy in the numerous hand missals that once populated the pews so many years ago. More precisely the Tridentine rubrics governing the "traditional" Roman Missal that made the private recitation of the priest as the normative default of the public celebration of the liturgy were to be forgone in favor of rubrics that made celebration of the old missal a corporate event. Is it then worthwhile to eventually re-institute such a liturgical environment, much as contemporary Traditionalist groups seem content to do? Or ought it not be deemed prudent to revisit the liturgical movement and try to follow the thought of those crucial luminaries of 1920s, 30s, and 40s and rediscover the Latin liturgy, keeping the co-mixture of propers and prayers as they were in the Missale Romanum and re-introducing rubrics designed to facilitate a corporate expression of that once venerable liturgy?

In point of fact, Traditionalism in the Roman Church does not have such lofty aims. There is no serious discussion on the succession of unfortunate steps in Papal liturgics of the 20th century - to do so would require taking some implicit elements of their ecclesiology to their natural conclusion, a Rubicon Traditionalism hasn't the cognitive capacity (nor theological mechanics) to cross. Nor is there any serious discussion regarding the ways in which the "Tridentine" liturgy represented an draconian impoverishment of the Latin liturgical tradition, not the least of which was the decision to base the missal on the priest's private celebration of Mass as opposed to the available orders which provided for a more corporate/ceremonial expression. Or what about the that Jerome's vulgate psalter is, at times, in violation of very reasonable criteria for translation? This is not so much to argue against the Roman books of 1962, or 1957, or whatever year you want to pick, as it is to point out obvious considerations that ideally would be part of Traditionalism's purview.

Traditionalism could at one time rest on the position of returning the Roman Church to a period where deconstructionism was not rampant and it was able to have the distance which provided a healthy perspective on the culture. In short, it at least offered a critique of modernity. I suppose the question Roman Traditionalism must ask itself is whether or not it still offers this critique, whether or not it provides a counter current for those who sense a shallowness in the promises of modernity. To this point, I would maintain that Ratzinger's Summorum Pontificum did more harm than good. Summorum Pontificum took the banner of Traditionalism and gave it the possibility of universal adoption. The end result has been the galvanization of a new breed of Traditionalists that have boiled the movement's essence down to liturgy and thereby proposed the acceptance of modernity (albeit of a more conservative stripe) as totally congruent with the liturgy that served as the spiritual nexus of the Traditionalist movement. Essentially, Traditionalism without the heart, or an arm of socio-political conservatism.

To a certain extent, Roman Traditionalists allowed the degeneration of the movement to happen. Traditionalists were never really honest about wanting things the way they were before Vatican II - they wanted a particular form of ultra montanist and immigrant/ethnic based piety devoid of historical perspective on the Latin Tradition. There was little interest in rediscovering Latin Christianity's medieval wonder and mysticism, still less in any serious movement to retrieve pre-modern liturgy.

We can live amid in a open air discussion of reconciling Lefebvre's brainchild  to the most anti-Lefebvrist Roman Pontiff in recent history because Roman Traditionalism has no other end-point. It has, from the moment it made its confused ecclesiology apparent, always been on the road to full assimilation. Plainly, so long as it remains a shallow parody of Classical Catholicism, it has nowhere else to go. It can only be schizophrenic (the Pope is infallible and his decisions binding upon all Christians, except the ones of the last fifty years) for so long until frazzled ecclesiology wears thin. Either commit to the direction papal minimalism (something along the lines of Orthodox ecclesiology), or tarry back to the Bishop of Rome, tale between the legs.

There is little doubt that Francis has found the avenue by which the SSPX will be reconciled to Rome ("they are obviously Catholic," he says). And there is little doubt the SSPX can quietly drop pretensions of "converting modernist Rome to eternal Rome." Roman piety is capable of domesticating its most troublesome sons and daughters. Much as Dorothy Day is increasingly framed in terms of the pious social worker (burying away her radical politics), so to the eventual St. Marcel will known as someone deeply devoted to the liturgy...in fact, I'll go one further, by the time St. Marcel of Econe has his holy cards put to press he will be known for "fought for the discipline of the liturgy as defined so clearly by the Council." You see that, you see how easy it will be to thoroughly assimilate Lefebvre into Vatican II liturgical praxis? By the time it happens, no one will have any immediate knowledge that this whole kerfuffle wasn't properly celebrating the Pauline liturgy. It will be easy enough to do, and, really, who would stop it?